Table 4.
Results of the conditional logit model
| Attribute and level | Estimate coefficient (standard error) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Scotland | Sweden | Country comparisonb | |
| Researchers: | |||
| University researchers | 0.214*** (0.05) | 0.168** (0.05) | 0.047 (0.07) |
| University /health service staff | 0.500*** (0.05) | 0.312*** (0.05) | 0.188** (0.07) |
| University/health service staff/government | 0.445*** (0.05) | 0.337*** (0.05) | 0.108 (0.07) |
| University/health service staff/government/commercial2 | Base levela | ||
| Data to be linked: | |||
| Primary care linked to other health records | 0.918*** (0.05) | 0.706*** (0.05) | 0.212** (0.07) |
| Health records linked to social care/education records | 0.664*** (0.05) | 0.403*** (0.05) | 0.261*** (0.07) |
| Health records linked to social care/education/employment/benefits records | 0.407*** (0.05) | 0.171*** (0.05) | 0.236** (0.07) |
| Health records linked to social care/education/ employment/benefits records/private sector | Base levela | ||
| Purpose: | |||
| Direct benefits for the people whose information is used | 0.322*** (0.04) | 0.254*** (0.04) | 0.068 (0.06) |
| Research conducted if it will have general public benefits | 0.548*** (0.04) | 0.430*** (0.04) | 0.118* (0.06) |
| Research for any reason | Base levela | ||
| Profit-making: | |||
| Nobody profits | 0.326*** (0.05) | 0.171*** (0.05) | 0.156* (0.07) |
| Profit shared with the public | 0.579*** (0.05) | 0.397*** (0.05) | 0.182* (0.07) |
| Profit invested into public services | 0.739*** (0.05) | 0.506*** (0.05) | 0.233** (0.07) |
| Profit goes to those doing the research | Base levela | ||
| Oversight: | |||
| Overseen by independent body | 0.346*** (0.05) | 0.420*** (0.05) | −0.074 (0.07) |
| Overseen by relevant public service | 0.265*** (0.05) | 0.457*** (0.05) | −0.192** (0.07) |
| Overseen by Government | 0.066 (0.05) | 0.289*** (0.05) | −0.223** (0.07) |
| Overseen by the organisation undertaking the research | Base levela | ||
| Constant | 0.886*** (0.08) | 0.620*** (0.08) | 0.266* (0.12) |
| Number of observations | 18,072 | 17,532 | 35,604 |
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001
a Each attribute used categorical levels, which were dummy coded relative to a base level (Table 1) that was deemed to be the ‘worst’
b The country comparison model, estimated using pooled data using a condition logit model, included interaction terms between dummy variables that identified the respondent’s nationality (1 = Scottish) and each attribute level